The Archbishop's Palace at Charing in the Middle Ages

http://kentarchaeology.org.uk/research/archaeologia-cantiana/

SARAH PEARSON

The future of the archbishop's palace at Charing, a Scheduled Ancient Monument and Grade I Listed Building, is currently under discussion. Prior to any restoration programme it is likely that detailed archaeological investigation will be required. This paper is offered as an interim report, based upon a survey undertaken in 1996 by the former Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England, with subsequent archival research. Part of the medieval residence, dating largely from the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, is unusually well preserved, and together with documentary evidence, a vivid picture emerges of the functions of a rural archiepiscopal residence of the time. The aim of the present paper is not to describe the buildings in minute detail, but to update previous work, set the surviving ranges in their historical context, and establish a baseline from which future research can begin.1 The manor of Charing is recorded as a possession of the see of Cant- erbury from the eighth century.2 By the eleventh century, the size of the estates and complexity of administration led Archbishop Lanfranc to divide the properties between Christ Church Priory and the archbishop- ric itself. Charing was kept for the use of the archbishop.3 It lies, like many manors in this part of Kent, on the spring line below the scarp of the North Downs, and in common with many of the other archiepiscopal residences, for instance Croydon, Lambeth and Maidstone, the buildings were placed directly next to the parish church (Fig. 1; Plate I). In the Middle Ages the main road from Maidstone to Ashford, and ultimately to Canterbury or the coast, passed directly in front of the archbishop's gate. The estate, which contained eight sulungs at Domesday, and somewhat over 300 acres in later times, spread to east and west, and the buildings lay within a walled enclosure of 4.94 acres.4 As fre- quently happened, a market grew up in front of the gate, and this was gradually replaced from the fifteenth century by permanent shops in the north-south street of the village, to the west of the residence.

315 SARAH PEARSON

CHARING PALACE KENT

fi$7 •-.-.'.•••#/. &•* ShtHw ,

CHARING / PALACE /»

St. Petei- ano St Paul

'i, ..\" 'in /

POND m Itile of) RCHM ENGLAND

Fig. 1 Landscape survey of the palace and surrounding area, 1996. Crown copyright. NMR.

316 THE ARCHBISHOPS PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

PLATE I

•

The church and palace, viewed from the south. The market lay in front of the palace gate. The grassy area in the foreground, which was known as Old Pond Yard and Old Barn Yard in 1736, sloped down to a pond and the stream. Photo: the author.

The surviving buildings date in the main from two periods: the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, and the years around 1500. They are ranged around a courtyard entered via a gatehouse from the market place to the south (Fig. 2). The south range, together with a ruined one to the west, contained lodgings. The great hall and entrance porch of the residence lies along the east side of the court, and beyond it to the east there is evidence for a further service court, now destroyed. The north side of the main court comprised the private apartments, including two chamber ranges and a chapel. While the overall layout is clear, most of the detail has been destroyed, and close dating and precise archaeological analysis of the individual ranges is difficult. Little has been written about Charing, the most important contributions being an article by P. K. Kipps, published in 1934, and a few tantalisingly brief remarks made by Stuart Rigold during the 1969 summer meeting of the Royal Archaeological Institute.5

317 1 tGreas; COURT

Chambe

Ga rde robe blocks

ranges

Ga t e nous

Fig. 2 Ground-plan of the palace, 1996. © Crown copyright. NMR. THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

The archbishop held estates throughout south-east England, and during the Middle Ages he was the largest landowner in Kent. He had seventeen residences which he constantly used in Kent, seven in Sussex and three in Surrey.6 Charing was not one of the more promin- ent properties but it was well-placed as a stopping-off point en route between other residences.7 The movements of several archbishops can be traced through their registers, which list their various acts and where they were signed. The registers of Archbishop Pecham (1279- 92), for example, show that he was endlessly on the move.8 Not all his nights can be accounted for, because he did not sign documents every day, so he may have come to Charing more often than is recorded. None- theless, he can be identified as coming two, sometimes three, times a year. He might come from Maidstone and go to Mayfield or South Mailing in Sussex. He might come from Otford, Croydon or Lambeth and journey on to Aldington or Hythe, or his destination might be Teynham, Wingham or Canterbury. Usually he is only known to have stayed a single night, but sometimes, as in April 1285, he may have remained at Charing for up to a week, and blank periods in the register may indicate longer stays in certain places, including Charing. By the time of Archbishop Pecham the manors were being directly exploited by the archbishops, but from the late eleventh to the early thirteenth century they had been leased out to farmers, who tended to be important local men. Charing, for which a late twelfth-century lease survives, was then held by Adam of Charing, who was the archbishop's steward in 1188. He had succeeded his father Ivo, and was to be followed by his son. The lease contained a clause requiring the farmer to provide for the archbishop and his household for two weeks each year, an amount of time which would allow him to use the property for overnight stays on several journeys.9 How the accommodation was divided between the farmer and the archbishop is not stated, but Becket (1162-70) is said to have favoured Charing, so it is likely that it was used fairly regularly and that there were good qual- ity buildings at that time.10 From this period there are no upstanding remains, but a single cushion capital which must date from the twelfth century has been reused in later walling. It suggests there was at least one building with free-standing columns, possibly an aisled hall, although its relatively small size might be more in keeping with a chapel or an undercroft.

The Chamber and Chapel in the late thirteenth century By the late thirteenth century the manors had been taken back into

319 SARAH PEARSON demesne, and documents of the time of Archbishops Kilwardby and Pecham give us a glimpse of the various buildings at Charing. A state- ment of receipts and expenditure during Kilwardby's time, 1273-8, itemises thatching on various buildings, including the great barn, the almonry, the gate and the 'cameram officii'. Note is made that board- ed partition walls were made for the kitchen, and another partition wall was daubed in the wardrobe of the new chamber ('in parietate wardrobe novecameredealbaudoijd')." In 1283-5, during the time of Archbishop Pecham, a survey of the customs of the manor of Charing outlined the holdings of the manor and, among other things, listed work due from the tenants.12 From this we learn that certain tenants were responsible for maintaining 50ft (15m) of the roof over the private treasury or chamber and 100ft (30m) over the hay barn.13 Other buildings which they had to maintain were the corn barn, piggeries, gatehouse and bake house, and whenever the archbishop came, some had to provide two men at the bake house, two at the kitchen and two at the brew house. Wealden tenants had to provide boards, laths, posts and studs when necessary, and work these into tie beams and posts as required. The most interesting fact to emerge from these documents is that the great chamber was considered 'new' in Kilwardby's time, that it may have been tiled, and that it was of some considerable size. One cannot be sure that the building referred to is the ruined chamber range at the west end of the private apartments (Fig. 2; Plate II), but since there is a general consensus that this building probably dates to the late thirteenth century,14 it may well be the same one where, in 1279, Thomas de Bendinge did homage to the archbishop in his chamber in Charing at the foot of his bed.15 Since the range has lost its roof and much of its walls the layout is not very clear, but it appears to have had a great first-floor chamber heated by a fireplace in the east wall and been lit in the south gable by a large window with seats to either side. Until recently it was tempting to assume that rafters, all with evidence for notched lap joints, that were reused over the adjacent range when that was heightened in c. 1500 might have come from this earlier chamber block. However, tree-ring analysis has produced the surprising result that, despite the notched lap joints, these rafters have a last measured ring date of 1481 and the timbers were probably felled between 1496 and 1521.16 Thus, whatever the explanation for their early form may be, the rafters certainly cannot have come from the early chamber range. The one other building which is likely to date from this period is the chapel. This was on the first floor, lying to the north-east of the private apartment block, and probably connected to it by other ranges

320 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING DN THE MIDDLE AGES

PLATE II

il!l . 1 in in

The private accommodation from the south-east. To the left is the ruined chamber range of the late thirteenth century. The central ranges were built in stone in the late fourteenth century and heightened in brick in the late fifteenth. The passage linking the private apartments to the hall can be seen to the right. Photo: the author

which have now gone (Fig. 2). Only the ground floor of the east end now survives, incorporated into a single-storey outhouse. But in the late eighteenth century the frame of the great east window still remained. Hasted described it as 'standing entire, being built of squared stone, mixed with flints; on the south side of it are three windows with pointed arches, and at the east end a much larger one of the same form'.17 It was built of flint with stone quoins, and some of the plaster- ing on the interior of the ground floor remains. The surviving undercroft below the chapel was not vaulted but spanned by massive timber joists which were housed in 30 x 30cm (1 x 1ft) sockets, set at 30cm intervals. Both the scantling of the floor joists and the former presence of two-centred windows make it certain that the remains of the chapel form part of the late thirteenth or early fourteenth-century work.

321 SARAH PEARSON

Plans for expansion Both building and documentary evidence for the residence become more explicit with the advent of Archbishop Winchelsea in 1294. From the registers indicating where he signed documents it is clear that Charing was a favoured spot.18 Like Pecham he came about twice a year, and on several occasions he stayed for some time. In April 1295 he was there for ten days. In May 1298 he probably stayed two weeks, with a further four days in June. Much later, in 1309, 1310 and at New Year 1311/12 he appears to have stayed for nearly a month at a time. As Du Boulay has shown, during the thirteenth century the archbishop's administration became ever more complex, and when Winchelsea died in 1313 there were ten household departments: wardrobe, chapel, chamber, almonry, buttery, pantry, kitchen, stables, arm- oury and hall. Most of these will have been physically represented by buildings, and several of them must have employed a number of people.19 In Winchelsea's will mention is made of a number of retainers including a steward, a marshal, a valet, a tailor, an usher, a cook, a sub- ordinate cook, and so forth, and to these one must add the archbishop's personal advisors. How many of them went on the move with the archbishop is less clear, but even without guests the retinue must have been sizeable and it looks as if the buildings at Charing were no longer large enough to accommodate everyone. Thus in May 1298, while he was there for an extended visit, Winchelsea applied to the king for permission to take in land on the south side of his court at Char- ing which entailed moving part of the road from Lenham to Ashford, specifically for the enlargement of the court. On 12 June 1298, when the archbishop was again in Charing, the application was heard by the sheriff of Kent and a number of local jurors, and permission to take in twenty-four feet was granted (Appendix l).20 Although he seems to have had to go to Otford the next day, he returned immediately for a further stay of three nights.21 Thus Winchelsea's visits that summer must have been taken up with plans for new buildings. A map of Charing suggests what may have occurred (Fig. 3). The buildings lie very close to the north side of the church, separated from the churchyard by a flint wall. If the line of this wall is carried westwards, ignoring the diagonal section of wall which joins the gatehouse range, it would connect more or less directly with the road from Lenham which joins the High Street from the west. At present a dog-leg across the High Street brings this road to the market place in front of the palace, but it is probable that before 1298 the east-west road ran straight across the front of the archbishop's property, and that his application concerned moving it southwards in order to en-

322 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

«• PALACE PRECINCT

^ ^2^e> CO p& N N % N S *> ^<$ ^ Ng-S-Jx X %> <#N N >

Fig. 3 Sketch map of Charing indicating the possible effect of the archbishop's successful application to enlarge his court in 1298. Prior to this the Lenham-Ashford road could have passed to the north of the church. After 1298 it may have followed the line of the present footpath to the south. Later it was diverted along Pett Lane. Drawn by the author. large his court and make room for the gatehouse range. Today, the road from the High Street stops at the church, but it is generally agreed that the old road to Ashford formerly ran through the market place and past the church. If the pre-1298 road ran in a straight line it would have passed north of the church; but once the palace had been extended it is possible that it was rerouted south of the church, where there is still a footpath. Later, it was diverted altogether, passing north of the palace precinct along what is known as Pett Lane. This diversion is undated, but possibly occurred after the Middle Ages since the three surviving fifteenth-century houses on the corners of the High Street and the two branches of the present east-west road face the latter, suggesting that it remained the more important thoroughfare throughout the Middle Ages.22 The plans for an enlarged court were not to serve the archbishop and his retinue alone. As has been noted by others,23 the obligation to dispense hospitality on a large scale became more pressing during the

323 SARAH PEARSON

late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, and at this time the residence at Charing was not only used by important secular or religious guests, but by the king himself. Edward I came in June 1297, and again in June 1299, at exactly the time when plans for expansion must have been under discussion.24 The first of these occasions is particularly interesting for, as the result of a quarrel with the king, Winchelsea's estates were sequestrated by Edward I from January to June 1297 and he was debarred from using them. They were restored to him on 12 June, eleven days after the king had stopped at Charing.25 So on that occasion the king must have been there without the archbishop. Winchelsea did not come to Charing much in the middle years of his archiepisc- opate, partly because his continuing problems with Edward I led to his exile abroad between 1306 and 1308, and partly perhaps because of building work. We do not know how much was achieved while he was archbishop, but one can speculate that at least some progress had been made by the time he came for lengthier stays in 1310, 1311 and 1312.

The Hall The hall is now but a shadow of its former self (Fig. 2, Plate III). It

PLATE III

\ \ \ \

The east range of the palace showing the Great Hall, porch and service end, with the narrow range on the left which linked the Hall to the private apartments. Photo: the author

324 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

was turned into a barn in the eighteenth century, an oast was built into one corner, and the whole was divided by central posts and reroofed in two spans at a much lower level than it was before. Prior to this, carved corbels set a little less than halfway up the walls carried a single-span roof with a far steeper pitch than the double-span roof of today (Fig. 4). The hall was five bays long (Fig. 5), the central three lit, at least on the west side, by windows like the one which survives (Plate IV). Two tiers of trefoil-headed lights are surmounted by an octafoil with elongated cusps. The details of corbels and window trac- ery have led to a suggested date of c. 1300-1310. The east wall has been largely rebuilt. The south bay of the hall, to the left of the long section, contained the screens passage. The west entrance to the hall still survives although it is largely obscured; the site of the east doorway can be identified, but its actual frame has gone. The north bay was the high end, whose form is somewhat uncertain since there has been a lot of rebuilding here, but on the west wall there is evidence for a doorway formerly leading from the hall to a passage linking the hall to the private apartments. The internal dimensions, 10.7m (35ft) wide by 21.8m (71 Vift) long, make this one of the largest surviving unaisled halls in the country. Among the nearest in size and form are two relatively local halls built in the early fourteenth century: Mayfield in Sussex and Penshurst Place in Kent. Mayfield was another residence of the archbishops, and one which they often visited immediately before or after Charing. It is usually thought to have been built by Archbishop Reynolds, who succeeded Winchelsea in 1313.26 The hall there was also unaisled, but unlike Charing a great stone arch spans the space, providing inter- mediate support for longitudinal roof timbers. Similar stone arches were also used under the central trusses of the much smaller halls of Ightham Mote and Battel Hall, Leeds (Kent), both built in the 1330s. The hall at Penshurst Place, probably built in the early 1340s, is shorter than Charing, but a metre wider, measuring 11.9m (39ft).27 Thus the builder was faced with much the same problem of placing a timber roof across an unusually wide span. However, at Penshurst the corbels are set far higher up the wall than at Charing, so the details of the roofs were probably not similar. In fact, the end trusses of the much smaller hall at Ightham Mote are far closer to the Charing arrangement. There low-set corbels support arch braces which in turn carry wall posts rising to the cornice running along the inner face of the wall. The upper part of the roof has crown posts carried on collars at the apex of the arch braces.28 There is no proof that the form of the Ightham Mote roof reflects that of Charing in detail, but scars in the walls above the corbels at Charing indicate the former presence of

325 SARAH PEARSON

approximate height of original ridge

c.l 300 north m window

7. I it-floor level 1 c.1500 1 st-floor level later doorway Blocked south % c.1300 doorway J t^ n

West

v_ Moulded stone of door jamb East

10 li %3 F09t Mfftrei o

Fig. 4 Cross section through the Great Hall, to the south, 1996. © Crown copyright. NMR. wall posts, and the survival of interacting pieces of evidence at Char- ing, Mayfield, Ightham Mote, Battel Hall, and finally Penshurst, suggests a group of related buildings, all of which seem to have been constructed between c. 1310 and the early 1340s. A similar date is suggested by comparing the stone corbels to those from elsewhere. All the corbels are damaged, and much of the detail has been lost. Most of them are carved with crude leaf forms, but two have harnessed oxen and human heads.29 Both types are not dissimilar to corbels in the bishop's hall at St Davids (Pembrokeshire), built by Bishop Henry de Gower (1328-47), which drew its inspiration from a

326 approximate height of original ridge "1 T

intra-mural passage

CO to ^1 r i

doorway to I chamber i i ranges

North South Service end doorway from screens passage to porch

Fee* =t Metres

Fig. 5 Long section through the Great Hall, to the west, 1996. © Crown copyright. NMR. SARAH PEARSON

PLATE IV

'«

4 ; • I • i - t V

• i—-*

Early nineteenth-century drawing of the west side of the Great Hall, showing the surviving window, the porch (with later stair turret to the left), and the service end to the right. BL: Add. MS 32358, fol. 16. Reproduced by permission of The British Library. wide circle of English ecclesiastical and high-status domestic buildings erected from the 1280s onwards.30 Timbers from the hall roof were among those sampled for tree-ring dating. Since the roof was entirely rebuilt the aim was to date its con- version to a barn rather than its original construction, and only timbers showing no obvious sign of reuse were sampled. Most did not date at all, but one rafter on the west side and a brace from a central post to a tie beam together formed a sequence with a date range of 1326-51." Clearly these timbers were reused, but whether from the great hall or from another building on the site is not known.

328 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

Taken at face value, the evidence of the roof timbers and the parallels cited above would suggest a date of construction for the hall in the 1320s or 30s rather than earlier. However, given the grandiose plans that Winchelsea clearly had in mind in 1298, it is likely that building construction began in earnest during his archiepiscopacy (he died in 1313), and therefore probable that the hall at Charing is early in the sequence of comparable buildings rather than later (particularly if the roof timbers came from another range). Rigold, whose opinion is always worth bearing in mind, thought the hall range dated from about 1300.32 If it was erected during the first and second decades of the fourteenth century it could have influenced the form of the other early fourteenth-century halls discussed above.

Services At the south, or service end of the hall, a pair of entrances lay in the standard medieval position on the east and west walls, with the doorway on the west side reached via a two-storey porch. The upper part of the porch was heavily remodelled in the late fifteenth century, when the present stair turret to the north was added, and again later; the floor level and west window have been altered (Fig. 4). However, one original single-light trefoil-headed window survives in the north wall (Plate IV). Above the first floor, the porch may originally have had a low pitched roof masked by crenellations, similar to the north porch at Penshurst. The stair to the first floor and roof lay in the thickness of the south wall, reached by a small and now-blocked doorway on the exterior (Plate V).33 This mural stair still survives in a damaged state; it has a vaulted roof supported by chamfered ribs, one of which is still in place. A doorway, now blocked, opened into the first- floor room, but the stair continued up to a higher level, probably reach- ing the roof via a spiral stair in a turret, for which traces remain. From the foot of the spiral stair an intra-mural passage ran across the south side of the hall, as indicated on the long section in Fig. 5. It lies nearly 6m (20 ft) above ground level, and now ends in fallen rubble just past the centre of the hall. The question of where it was intended to go is one of the puzzles of the building.34 To the south of the hall lies a single-storeyed area under a post- medieval lean-to roof. The east and west walls have been replaced with large double doorways, but evidence for an earlier west wall lies within the present end, and this is shown in a nineteenth-century drawing in which the ground floor is lit by a single-light window with a trefoiled head similar to that lighting the north wall of the porch (Plate IV).35 This indicates that the service end was always wider than

329 SARAH PEARSON

PLATE V

<• * ••"•

-':. wi • ; aw* ^

: • : U • M • ;-s ^

Porch of the Great Hall, showing the original entrance and the small blocked doorway to the intra-mural stair. Photo: the author. the hall, its west wall joining the porch in a similar manner to the north wall of the service end at Penshurst. Less evidence survives for the east wall, and it may have been on the present line, with a stair turret projecting beyond (see below). The south wall is built of flint and stone but is poorly constructed and only 54cm (1ft 9in.) thick. It is likely that this has been rebuilt, although it probably lies in approx- imately the correct position if, as at present, there was always an external way through between the end wall of the hall range and the churchyard wall to the south.

330 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

The service end was entered from the hall by four doorways, none of which survive unaltered (Fig. 4). The two to the right are central to the hall. Although rebuilt in brick, they appear to occupy the openings of primary doorways of which a few stones survive, and presumably gave access to two service rooms. The tall, narrow doorway to their left has no evidence of early work and was probably a late insertion. However, the fourth, or left-hand doorway, whose outer jamb lies partly within the thickness of the east wall, appears to have been part of the original structure. Its exterior face is now visible outside the building, and it may have opened onto a projecting stair turret which connected with the mural passage and led to the first floor over the service end. Rigold implied that he thought the service end was 'a mere one- storeyed outshut' from the start.36 However, evidence for heavy floor beams in the walls joining the hall and porch, the presence of the high mural passage, the probability that there was a stair turret to the east, and the fact that the end was wider than the hall and therefore must have been roofed separately, all combine to suggest that an original first floor over this end is likely. Certainly drawings and photographs of upper windows or loading doorways in the relatively recent past indicate that there was an upper floor later on. Careful archaeological investigation during restoration may provide more evidence to settle the matter of the original form. Whether the south wall of the service end lies in its original position or not, it is clear that there was never room for a kitchen beyond it, a point reinforced by the presence of only two service doorways from the hall. Instead, it is likely that the kitchen and ancillary service buildings lay in a second court to the east of the hall. This is now a farmyard with no visible early remains. But in 1833 it was reported that a building of octagonal form with a floor composed of tiles set on edge, and 'sewers', had been uncovered 'near the vicarage', which lies a short way to the east of the farmyard.37 This was thought to be the palace kitchen. At the time of the 1996 survey a circular mark formed by differences in the growth of grass and weeds was visible approxim- ately 15m (49ft) east of the service end, and it was speculated that this might mark the site of the tiled floor. Documentary evidence indicates that in the fifteenth century there was a passage or 'tresaunce' between the hall and kitchen.38 The term can indicate a first-floor gallery,39 and it is tempting to suggest that there were two-storeyed buildings in the eastern court, reached from the first floor of the service end and from the mural passage, thus making some sense of the latter, which must surely have been going somewhere, and not just intended to rise, cross the hall and immediately descend to ground level again.

331 SARAH PEARSON

PLATE VI

Gatehouse range from the south-west showing the two former garderobe blocks projecting from the west lodging range. Photo: the author.

The Gatehouse and Lodging Ranges The other buildings which Winchelsea clearly had in mind from the moment he applied to extend his court in 1298 are the south and west ranges (Fig. 2). The gateway, with a large arch for carts and horses and a small one for pedestrians, lies towards the east end of the south range. Above and to either side are chambers, partly turned into a cottage and partly ruined. Of the main west range at right angles, only the ground-floor walls survive, but two, two-storey wings still stand, projecting to the west (Plate VI). One has been converted into a cottage, the other serves as a stable. Despite the poor condition, evidence for the functions of these ranges remains. The gateway was formerly vaulted, the shallow vault carried on decorative, but now severely damaged, corbels. To the west lay the porter's lodge, with its own doorway and a small window to oversee the traffic. Once through the gate (Plate VII) one could turn to the east, where a doorway led to a small ground-floor room, or to the west, where two doorways, now blocked, probably opened onto a stair rising to the first floor and

332 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

PLATE VII

r. - v-

North facade of the gateway and adjoining area. The eastern blocked doorway formerly opened into a small ground-floor room, the western one probably led to a stair to the first floor. The area above and to the east of the gate formed a large, well-appointed chamber. Photo: the author. into the room or rooms below. The first doorway is clearly visible, but the quoins of the second have been removed. A spacious first- floor chamber stretched from the east gable across the gateway below. It was heated by a fireplace in the north wall, with a tiled back and stone corbelled jambs surmounted by heads which formerly carried a lintel and hood. In the south-east corner a latrine chute specifically to serve this chamber remains. Further west, beyond the suggested stair- way, the original details have almost gone, but it is likely that access between the chambers - there were probably two of them - lay along the south wall, the jamb of one doorway surviving towards the west end. The west range only survives at ground level and little evidence of its junction with the south range remains, but it is likely that the roof of the south range continued across both it and the projecting west wing beyond. The east wall of the west range retains evidence for two blocked doorways, and an early nineteenth-century drawing shows a third (Plate VIII). As in the south range, ground and first-floor rooms

333 SARAH PEARSON

PLATE VIII

r-> '

: -

- i

LmUk\

Early nineteenth-century drawing of the west lodging range from the east. The right-hand doorway no longer survives. BL: Add. MS 32358, fol. 18. Reproduced by permission of The British Library.

were probably reached separately. In both ranges, windows are either single or double lights with trefoiled heads. The details may, as Rigold was inclined to suggest, be later than those of the hall, dating to the middle rather than the early fourteenth century, although there is little left from which to assign precise dates. The two wings projecting westwards from this range appear to have served as communal garderobe or latrine blocks. The southern one is now a cottage (Plate VI) and no internal details are visible, but the first floor of the northern one not only has a ledge for supporting the ceiling between the floors, but also a vertical scar 1 m (3ft) in from the

334 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES west or rear wall and a higher ledge in the rear wall which seem to mark the position of the seats. The wings each had three arched openings at ground level for cleaning the latrines, but no other details of the layout at ground-floor level survive. The sewage from all the latrines, and presumably from others in the private accommodation, must have drained down the hill (Plate I) towards the stream, fish ponds and watermill which lay to the south - the stream and a former pond are marked on the site plan (Fig. 1) and the stream then goes under- ground and continues south-east to where the mill lay. It seems in- conceivable that the waste would have been allowed to mix with fresh water, so there was probably a highly complex drainage system in the area below the residence. The implication is that the two wings served as lodging ranges, the first floor consisting of one self-contained suite and a considerable amount of communal accommodation. The ground-floor rooms, entered separately, may have had the same function, but might equally have served other purposes, such as offices or storage. Whether the ranges were built in the early or the mid fourteenth century it is almost certain that outline planning at least took place in the late thirteenth, when Winchelsea applied to move the road to make room for new building. Lodging ranges are normally discussed in terms of the fully developed plan form, when each room was self-contained, with its own stair and latrine, the whole usually set around a quad- rangular court. Surviving examples date from the later fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.40 However, lodgings for retainers and guests were a necessity long before that. References to the building or repairing of knights', squires', clerks', etc. chambers are common in accounts for royal palaces during the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries,41 and the terms used to describe them suggest large, undivided spaces of the kind remaining at Charing. Similar lodgings must also have been supplied in larger secular and ecclesiastical houses, such as the archiepiscopal residences at Canterbury and Lambeth.42 No evidence for them survives today. Thus, despite their ruined state, the two ranges at Charing, which seem not to have been updated in any significant way, are important and unusual survivals of early lodging accommodation, representing an earlier stage of development than the surviving individual lodgings of the later fourteenth-century.

The palace in the mid fourteenth century By the middle of the fourteenth century the residence had become a large complex. As the landscape survey plan shows (Fig. 1), the main court provided access to the hall, private chambers, and lodging

335 SARAH PEARSON ranges. To the east of the hall lay the kitchen court, although nothing of this now remains. Pecham's survey of the 1280s makes clear that there was then a large hay barn with 100ft (30m) of roof (the length possibly relating to both sides of the roof), as well as a corn barn and other agricultural buildings. Unfortunately, we do not know for certain where these ranges lay. The area within the precinct wall to the north of the palace has signs of earthworks, but the landscape archaeologists believed that only the platform marked G, and perhaps the area marked D are likely to represent buildings. Outside the precinct to the south, the land slopes down to the stream. Here again the undulating ground indicates earthworks. In 1736 this area was divided into two, the part to the west called Old Pond Yard and that to the east Old Barn Yard. The rectangular depression at K on plan may be a fishpond, great drain or water channel, or it could represent the robbed foundations of a large building. The roughly rectangular piece of ground between M and N may indicate the site of a building which could have been a barn, as suggested by the name on the 1736 map, but it was not possible to confirm this.43 Further south-west there was certainly a pond connecting with the stream. The watermill lay to the south-east, off the plan, in the area now known as The Moat. The extent of the accommodation is brought to life by the rare survival of an expense account from the time of Archbishop Strat- ford, probably dating to 1348 (Appendix 2).44 The document covers household expenses between 1 and 31 March. Two entries relate to Charing, on 21 and 26 March, with a visit to Canterbury in between. From this we learn that hay was required for eighty horses when the lord visited, and that these consisted of ten hacks for the archbishop and his household, twelve yearlings and a large number of draught animals. Wages, expenses and tips were paid to the baker and two boys helping him, four chapel servants, four valets, fifteen pages and fifty-eight other boys. Since it was Lent, fish was the main item on the menu, with 600 herrings bought in total, plus a salted salmon, a sturgeon, and a considerable amount of cod, pike, eels, bream, trout and other fish. Over the two occasions 428 loaves of bread were baked and something like fifteen gallons of wine and 160 gallons of beer laid on.45 The only named guest was the abbot of Faversham, who dined with the archbishop on 26 March, but one must also imagine a number of officials, advisers and personal servants who travelled with the archbishop and whose wages or expenses were not included in these accounts. The document provides a unique insight into the arrangements necessary for housing the archbishop and even a single guest during Lent. Preparations for feast days, such as for Shrove Tuesday, the meat for which is listed in Appendix 2, or for a royal

336 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES visit, such as that which Edward II had made in 1326, would have been considerably more splendid.46 A document such as this puts into perspective the amount of accommodation required, and suggests there were likely to have been more ranges than survive today.

The Private Accommodation in the late fourteenth and fifteenth centuries The final area of the palace to be discussed is the later medieval evidence for private accommodation. As previously mentioned, the chapel and west chamber ranges probably date from around or before 1300, but most of the rest of the buildings to the north of the courtyard are later. They are probably not additions but replace earlier accommodation which was no longer considered suitable. Some of the other archbishops' residences were almost wholly rebuilt in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, but on the whole this applies to those in the vicinity of London, not to places such as Charing, Aldington or May- field. The growing importance of London made it expedient for the archbishop to be on hand near the Court, and this resulted in the dim- inishing importance of Canterbury as a headquarters. In the later Middle Ages it is residences such as Knole, Otford, Croydon and Lam- beth which received most attention. Moreover, from the late fourteenth century onwards the manors began to be farmed out again, Charing probably being leased again during the 1390s.47 This did not mean that the archbishop could not visit, but the archbishops were no longer quite so constantly on the move from one place to the next, and there was a much more hands-off approach to the estates. Building did not cease altogether, but the great days of expansion in the more far-flung residences was over, and most of the fifteenth-century documents which survive are concerned with minor repairs to what was already there.48 The hall and lodgings at Charing were largely left as they were, and only the private apartments were substantially updated, on at least two occasions, in the late fourteenth and the late fifteenth centuries. The range to the east of the ruined late thirteenth-century chamber block was built in flint and stone, probably in the late fourteenth century (Fig. 2; Plate II). The recessed area on the east side, labelled 'porch' on plan, is also likely to have been put up around this time, but was heavily remodelled later. Initially both parts were of two storeys only. The larger range now contains only two original spaces, a room at the front, and a stair hall behind. The area to the north of this is a two-storey kitchen block, built of brick in the seventeenth century, but it is likely to have replaced an earlier range;49 indeed it is

337 SARAH PEARSON almost certain that the whole north-east corner between the earlier western chamber block and the chapel, now empty of building, formed part of the accommodation in the Middle Ages, and the stair by which one reached the first-floor chambers and chapel must have been situated in this area. On the ground floor, the surviving central range appears to have been entered from the north (perhaps from the stair hall), by a stone doorway with moulded surround and two- centred head which survives next to the seventeenth-century stairs. The only other details visible today are timber cornices with late fourteenth-century quarter-round mouldings at the top of the present stair. Originally it appears that this area and the room to its south formed a single great chamber, heated by a fireplace in the large stack which is now completely hidden in the east wall. There are a lot of problems surrounding the interpretation of the smaller range to the east, but by the fifteenth century at least this seems to have become a porch forming the main entrance to the private apartments. A doorway in the south wall (now a bay window) opened into the porch from the exterior,50 and a second doorway in the north wall led to the private accommodation. Most oddly the inner doorway opens only into a narrow passage area leading west to the apartment blocks and east to the hall. The passage is partly built of flint and stone and partly of brick. Its basic structure probably dates to this time, although it was heavily remodelled later. The development of this whole area is puzzling, and one must hope that more evidence to elucidate its history will be uncovered during restoration. However, it seems certain that the private accommodation was never linked to the hall by more than a narrow passage at any time during the Middle Ages. Rigold saw this relative isolation as reflecting earlier medieval practice which was never obliterated.51 By the fourteenth century the plans of secular houses had become integrated, with halls set between private and service ends - as for example at Penshurst - but it seems that the same may not have been true for a more public residence of this sort. Analysis of several other archiepiscopal houses indicates anom- alies of the same kind. At Maidstone, the great ground-floor hall of the archbishop's thirteenth and fourteenth-century palace no longer survives, the 'guard room' or first-floor hall of the fourteenth century clearly having served as a secondary hall or audience chamber. But excavation in the courtyard between the so-called 'dungeon' and the main block of the present palace, has revealed considerable foundations which may include a ground-floor hall.52 If such a hall existed it could only have been loosely attached to the rest of the early apartments. At Croydon, the undercrofts of the chapel and great chamber

338 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES are separated from the great hall by an area which Faulkner referred to as the 'west chamber block'. Of this range he wrote 'there is nothing surviving of a 13th- or 14th-century west chamber block, although this must have existed, if only to account for the space between the hall and the earlier building' [writer's italics].53 But if there had been no building here at that time, the private apartments would have stood slightly detached from the hall, perhaps linked by a pentice, which is probably what occurred at Charing before the later medieval passage range was erected. Finally, at Mayfield, the great chamber of the late thirteenth or early fourteenth century stands some distance from the upper end of the fourteenth-century hall, linked by a grand stair and passage which occupies one side of a small courtyard.54 Nothing in the linking range is as early as the hall or great chamber to either side, and once again one may question whether there was such a range there to begin with. If this interpretation of these houses in the fourteenth century is correct, then the linking range at Charing is more easily ex- plained, its oddity lying only in the fact that it survives because Char- ing received so little attention after the fourteenth century, whereas the other residences, which remained in archiepiscopal hands or became secular houses of some standing, were substantially modified and brought up to date after the Reformation. Thus it is possible that an arrangement which had long been ob- solete for secular houses remained in use in the archbishop's residences until the Reformation because the archbishop wished to sep- arate his personal accommodation from the public areas of the complex. In addition, the whole matter of how the property was divided between the archbishop and the farmer might also have played a part although we have no evidence for this. The first lease to survive foi Charing, in 1522, mentions only that 'the great stable, and one hay- barn' should be reserved for the archbishop. This leaves open the question of what domestic buildings the archbishop retained for his own use, but perhaps suggests that the lessee was not entitled to occupy any of the domestic ranges at that time.55 The final building work of the archbishops at Charing probably took place during the archiepiscopacy of Morton (1486-1500). In 1493 he was granted a licence for impressing stone cutters and brick layers to build on his manors in Kent, Surrey and Sussex,56 and Leland, writing less than half a century later, describes him as 'making great building at Charing'.57 The brickwork of the top storey of the surviving chamber ranges (Plate II), with diamond patterns of black headers set in red brick with stone quoins, is very similar to brickwork on the gatehouse at Lambeth Palace, or that of the west facade of the west range at Croydon, both of which were built during Morton's time. The remain-

339 SARAH PEARSON ing part of the upper floor of the chamber block is now derelict, but it was provided with a good fireplace which still survives. Although there is now only a single room and an anteroom which always contained a stair, it is likely, as discussed above, that the range originally extended further north and that a fine suite of rooms were added at this level. The stair, for which evidence survives, lay in the porch block, and the porch doorway mentioned above is probably of this date. Parts of the passage connecting the private apartments to the hall display the same brick details as the upper floors, and the blocked doorway opening into the hall is likely to be contemporary. At much the same time the room over the porch to the great hall was also altered by raising the floor and ceiling and creating a new west window, and a less cramped stair in the form of a new brick stair turret with stone dressings was added (Plate IV). This latter was set against the north-east corner of the porch, next to the hall, where it partly blocks one of the original windows. The details are similar to the stair turrets of the gatehouse at Lambeth. Whether these additions can be interpreted as constituting 'great building' at Charing, or whether other work took place which has subsequently disappeared, we do not know. Whatever occurred, however, seems to have impressed the king, for towards the end of Mor- ton's life Henry VII began to use Charing on a regular basis, as if it was the most convenient hotel in the district. He came once in 1498, and twice in 1499, once staying two nights. After Morton's death there was a gap, but once Archbishop Warham was appointed in 1503, he came again. In 1505 and 1506 he came for single nights, but in 1507 and 1508 he seems to have stayed for three or four days.58 Is this just chance, or are we justified in seeing a connection between the newly upgraded accommodation and the king's visits? We shall never know, but it is tempting to speculate that it was not just coincidence that the two main periods of royal visits, in the years around 1300 and 1500, coincided with the two main building programmes at Charing. Henry VIII followed in his father's footsteps, using the palace regularly in the early years of his reign, coming twice in 1511 and staying nearly two weeks in 1513. After that his visits tail off, although he is well-known for having stopped in Charing on his way to France for the Field of the Cloth of Gold meeting in 1520. And he came back later in 1541, 1542 and 1544, just before he decided to include Char- ing among the properties which he forced Cranmer to exchange with him.59 To entertain kings one would imagine that there was more accommodation than survives today. Restoration and some archaeological investigation may provide further clues. In 1545 Cranmer was made to hand Charing over to Henry VIII.60

340 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

The lessees were then one John Brent and his son William, who had a 50-year lease running from 1541.61 Both the Brents had died by 1565 and their property may have passed to a Thomas Brent of Will- esborough, near Ashford.62 Possibly this led to a lack of interest in the property, for in 1575 one William Lovelace was accused of burning, selling and spoiling the old hall and other buildings, and taking 'iron, glass, leade, waynescott, brycke, and tyle'. In fact, the Commission set up to investigate the case could only discover that Lovelace 'wasted' 16 shillings worth of old timber.63 But while this is all they could prove, the actual damage may have been far greater. In 1579 Thomas Perry, gentleman, was granted a lease in reversion after the expiry of the 50-year Brent lease. This was followed by others to local gentry, including one of 1593 to Sir Nicholas Gilborne who is said to have kept his shrievality here in 1611/12, which suggests the property was then in good repair.64 A stone plaque with the date 1586 carved on it remains over the former porch doorway to the private apartments. However, there is no sign in the surviving building of any significant work of this period, and it is possible that the plaque was set there at a later date. Charles I sold the property in 1629/30.65 It passed through several hands during the seventeenth century, but was sold in 1692 to Sir George Wheler for £1,430.66 It remained with the Wheler family until sold to the Homewoods in the mid twentieth century. During the ownership of the Whelers the estate was certainly leased on occasion, although it was also used by the family from time to time. In any case, the great days of building were over, and apart from turning the private apartments into a comfortable dwelling in the seventeenth century, and converting parts of the lodging ranges to two cottages and making the old hall into a barn and an oast in the eighteenth, little new building took place. Thus, despite inevitable decay, an unusually large amount of early work remains which provides insights into the accommodation required by the archbishops in the early fourteenth century.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This paper is by no means the unaided work of the author, but relies heavily on contributions from a number of people. The architectural survey and accompanying report was undertaken by Tony Calladine and John Heward of RCHME, together with the author. The landscape survey was the work of Paul Pattison, Alastair Oswald and Trevor Pearson, also of RCHME. Medieval documents were trans-

341 SARAH PEARSON cribed and translated by Bridgett Jones, with further suggestions by Duncan Harrington. Pat Winzar and Tim Bain-Smith provided considerable historical detail, and Pat Winzar was responsible for research on the post-medieval history of the palace. The owners, the late Mrs Homewood and her daughter Brenda Ansell, generously allowed unlimited access to the buildings. The author is grateful to all of them for making this publication possible.

APPENDIX 1: APPLICATION AND PERMISSION TO ENLARGE THE COURT IN 1298 (Transcribed and translated by Bridgett Jones)

PRO: C. 143/27/9 Inquisition ad quod damnum, 26 Edward I (1298) mem.l

Dorse: R[obert] archbishop of Canterbury: Concerning enclosing away from Charing towards Ashford.

Edward by the grace of God king of England, lord of Ireland and Duke of Aquitaine sends greeting to the sheriff of Kent. We command you that through the oaths of upright and lawful men of your bailiwick through whom the truth of the matter can be known, you should diligently make inquires whether it may be to the loss or harm of us or of others if we concede to the venerable father Rfobert] archbishop of Canterbury that he may enclose a certain way which leads from Lenham, below the court of Charing manor of the archbishop himself on the north part, towards Ashford and Wye, to enlarge the same court, and that he may hold that enclosure for himself and for successive archbishops of Canterbury in perpetuity. Then, however, that the same archbishop in place of the way itself shall make a certain other way of the same width in his own ground on the same part of the aforesaid manor, and whether or not it may be to the loss or damage of us or that of others, then to what loss and to what damage and of whom and how in what manner and how much that way shall contain in number of feet, and you shall send the result of the inquisition thus fairly and openly made to us without delay and by this writ under your seal and the seals of those through whom it shall have been made. Witness myself at ?E[ltha]m on 14th day of May in the twenty-sixth year of our reign [1298].

On dorse: The response to this writ is shown by the inquisition attached to this writ.

342 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

PRO: C. 143/27/9 Inquisition ad quod damnum, 26 Edward I (1298) mem. 2

Inquisition taken at Charing before Henry of Apeltrefeld sheriff of Kent on the Thursday next after the octave of the Holy Trinity in the twenty-sixth year of the reign of king Edward [12 June 1298] by the oath of Luke de Porta, William de Brokhell, John de Pluckley, William de Welton, John de Felethe, William de Selue, Henry Car- bonel, William de Acketon, Geoffrey de Pett, Alexander de Ripple, Henry de Herst, and Adam de Drokescumbe who state that Robert archbishop of Canterbury may enclose a certain way which contains in width twenty-four feet, which way leads from Lenham, below the court of the manor of Charing of the archbishop of Canterbury himself on the north part, towards Ashford and Wye, to enlarge the same court, and he may hold that enclosure for himself and successive archbishops of Canterbury in perpetuity without loss or harm to the lord king or of anyone else whosoever, and that the archbishop in place of the aforesaid way may make a certain other way of the same width, that is of twenty-four feet, on his own ground at the same part of the aforesaid manor. In testimony of which matter the sworn men together with the sheriff have placed their seals upon this inquisition.

APPENDIX 2: ACCOUNTS RELATING TO PREPARATIONS FOR A VISIT OF JOHN STRATFORD, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, 21 AND 26 MARCH 1348 (Transcribed and translated by Bridgett Jones)

Westminster Abbey Muniments: 9222 On dorse: Accompte of the archbishopp of Canterbury. Charge of houses etc.

Charing: Friday, 21 March at Charing (in left-hand margin: of the allowances of 25 gallons of wine). The pantry: Bran and 1 quarter of wheat bought from the manor of Maidstone Is. Ad. and they produced 212 loaves of bread, of these 210 were used (in right-hand margin: the pantry 8s. Id. and a half). Additional expenses of John the baker with 2 boys for the bakehouse Id. and a half, for 1 pound of candles bought for the bakehouse before the lord's coming (in left-hand margin: concerning the bakehouse 1 quarter of bran from the market, 6 bushels in part of oats). The buttery: For 81 gallons of ale bought for diverse purposes 9s. &Ad., for carriage of the ale 2d. (in right -hand margin: the buttery 9s. W-fad.) The kitchen: For 7 cod bought

343 SARAH PEARSON

3s. 9V2d., for 10 stockfish bought 15*1, for 302 herring bought 2s. Ad., for 1 pike presented and 3 bream price As., for 1 salted salmon bought 10d., for sea-fish bought 13.?., for fat eels bought I2d., for a sturgeon bought 18

Charing (in left hand margin: of the allowances of 27 gallons of wine). On Wednesday the 26th day of March at Charing and the abbot of Faversham was with the lord at dinner. The pantry: For bran, 7 bushels of wheat bought from Westgate 6s. 6lAd., then bran, 1 bushel of wheat bought from the manor of Maidstone 1 \V*d. and 212 loaves were made, of these 204 loaves were used. Expenses of one cart for preemption with bread Ad. Item expenses of Richard the bakehouse boy and of 2 boys delivering in the town 3s. For 2 pounds of candles bought in the town for the bakehouse Id. The buttery: For 80 gallons of ale bought at divers places 7s. 5d., for carriage of ale 2d.(in

344 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES right-hand margin: 68 firkins). The kitchen: For 7 cod bought 4s. Id., for 3 stockfish bought 8J. by preemption, for fish by preemption 2 pikes price 3s. Ad., for 300 herrings bought 2s., for 1 lamprey received bought 10s., for sea fish bought lis. 61/2

The date of this account roll must be 1348 as Tuesday 4 March was evidently Shrove Tuesday and 5 March was Ash Wednesday. At Maidstone on Shrove Tuesday, four sheep, two calves, a boar's head, one ham and fat pigs were ordered for the kitchen, and ten rabbits, a swan, pheasant, capons, doves, mallards, twenty hens as food allowance (pultura). On Wednesday 5 March a very meagre allowance of fish was ordered, and thereafter only fish throughout the whole of March. A note on the roll gives 1347 as the probable year, but Ash Wednesday fell on 14 February that year. 1347 has probably been suggested because mention is made of Earl Warenne's execution, which occurred that year. However, as no archbishop of Canterbury would have been feasting in Lent, 1348 is more likely.67

345 SARAH PEARSON

NOTES

1 The Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England is now part of English Heritage. The original RCHME report, National Monument Record no. TQ 94 NE2, provides a more detailed description of the buildings than can be included here. The author is grateful to English Heritage for permission to use the original survey drawings. 2 F.R.H.Du Boulay, The Lordship of Canterbury (London, 1966), 18,19;N.Brooks, The Early History of the Church of Canterbury (Leicester, 1984), 115, 131. 3 D. C. Douglas, Domesday Monachorum of Christ Church, Canterbury (London: Royal Historical Society, 1944), 85. 4 At the time of Archbishop Pecham's survey of the manor in 1283-5 there were 307 acres plus 334 acres of woodland (K. Witney, ed., The Survey of Archbishop Pecham's Kentish Manors, 1283-85, Kent Records, vol. 28 (2000), 187-211. In 1736, when owned by the Wheler family, the estate consisted of 318 acres and 2 roods ('A map of the palace of Charing and other houses and land adjoining in the town and parish of Charing belonging to Granville Wheler Esq., 1736', CKS: U 1293, 4). The area of the precinct, of 4 acres and 2-3 roods, was the acreage given in the exchange between Cranmer and the Crown in 1545 (F. R. H. Du Boulay, 'Archbishop Cranmer and the Canterbury temporalities', English Historical Review, vol. 67 (1952), 27), and the acreage of Palace Yard as recorded in 1736. 5 P. K. Kipps, 'The Palace of the Archbishops of Canterbury at Charing, Kent, now called Palace Farm', Archaeological Journal, vol. XC (1933), 76-97, including a number of photographs of the buildings; S. E. Rigold, 'Charing Palace', ibid., vol. CXXVI (1969), 267. 6 Du Boulay, op. cit. (note 2), 239. 7 Most of the south-eastern residences and the roads linking them are mapped in T. Tatton-Brown, Lambeth Palace: a history of the Archbishops of Canterbury and their houses (London, 2000), 39. 8 F. N. Davis and D. Douie, eds., The Register of John Pecham, Archbishop of Can- terbury 1279-92, Canterbury and York Society, vols 63, 65 (1968-9). See especially his itinerary, vol. 63, ix-xvi. 9 For the details of Adam's tenure of Charing see Du Boulay, op.cit. (note 2), 200-03. 10 Ibid., 238. 11 Account of receipts and expenditure for one year of the bailiffs of manors in Surrey and Kent belonging to the see of Canterbury, rendered to Sir Thomas de Lyndstede treasurer. Written in a late 16th-century hand at the end of the roll: 'Robertus Kilwarby archbishop 1272-78', BL: Add. MS 29794. 12 Witney, op. cit. (note 4). The document exists in two versions, a longer one of the late fifteenth century (Charing: 187-211), and a summary version written between 1293-1313 (Charing: 368). 13 Important differences exist between the two versions of the document. The earlier version uses the term 'private treasury' (368), the later one refers to the same building as the 'private chamber' (e.g. 196, 198). The late 15th-century survey states that the roofs over the hay barn and private chamber were tiled, but the earlier version specifically refers to thatch. It is possible that one version is inaccurate, but also perhaps possible that both are correct, and that roofs which were thatched in the late 13th century were tiled by the 15th century. Tiles were certainly referred to elsewhere in the earlier version of the survey, over the cowhouse at Teynham (366) and the barns at Boughton (367). Mary Adams, in her work on early tile-making, found no evidence for tiling on Christ Church Priory manors before 1285 ('The development of roof-tiling

346 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

and tile-making on some mid-Kent manors of Christ Church Priory in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries', Archaeologia Cantiana, vol. 126 (1996), 35-59). 14 Kipps, op. cit.(note 5), 79; Rigold, loc. cit. (note 5). 15 Davis, op. cit. (note 8), vol. 63, 9. 16 Work undertaken for English Heritage by Nottingham University Tree-Ring Dating Laboratory, unpublished Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 45/98. 17 Illustrated in the Gentleman's Magazine, vol. 103, pt 2 (1833), pi. opp. 113; E. Hasted, The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent, VII (2nd edn 1798, reprinted 1972), 430. 18 R. Graham, ed., Registrum Roberti Winchelsey, Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi, 1294-1313, Canterbury and York Society, vols 51, 52 (1952, 1956), especially his itinerary, vol. 51, xxxviii-xlii; Witney, op. cit. (note 4), Iviii. 19 Du Boulay, op. cit. (note 2), 254-5. 20 Inquisition ad Quod Damnum, 26 Edward I, PRO: C.143/27/9. The formal licence was enrolled in the Patent Rolls on 18 July 1298. See Calendar of Patent Rolls, Edward I, vol. Ill, 1292-1301, p. 356. 21 Davis, op. cit. (note 8), vol. 63, xi. The layout of the roads through Charing in the Middle Ages is unclear. By 1596, when Symonson made his map of Kent, on which he included the major roads, the only road shown to pass through Charing village was the High Street. By that date, i.e. after the Reformation when the archbishops no longer held the property, the main road from Maidstone to Ashford lay well to the south, through Charing Heath. However, the orientation of the medieval houses at the cross roads in the village suggests that the layout in the late 13th century may have been different. For example, A. Emery, Greater Medieval Houses of England and Wales, vol 2 (Cambridge, 2000), 39. 24 Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1292-1301, 250, 422. Although the archbishop was allowed access to his properties at this time, a com- plete reconciliation between king and archbishop did not take place until July (J. H. Denton, Robert Winchelsey and the Crown, 1294-1313, Cambridge studies in medieval life and thought, vol. 14 (Cambridge, 1980), 100-35, esp. 131). 26 For example, M. Wood, The English Medieval House (London, 1965), 52, 63. 27 M. Binney, 'Penshurst Place, Kent', Country Life (9 March 1972), 554-8. For a section through one of these trusses see S. Pearson et al, A Gazetteer of Me- dieval Houses in Kent, (RCHME/HMSO, 1994), 75. Tree-ring dating indicates that this hall was built between 1327-47 (S. Pearson, The Medieval Houses of Kent: an His- torical Analysis (RCHME/HMSO, 1994), 149. The best survivor was until recently located on one of the precinct walls. It has now been removed, conserved and is stored in the hall, its future awaiting a decision when restoration takes place. 30 See N. Coldstream in R. Turner, 'St Davids Bishop's Palace, Pembrokeshire', An- tiquaries Journal, vol. 80 (2000), 146-70, and figs 36-45. See note 16 above. 32 Rigold, loc. cit. (note 5). 33 A similar stair survives at the Bishop's Palace at Wells, Somerset (1275-92), although it is reached from inside rather than outside the porch. 4 Kipps, op. cit. (note 5), 91 mentioned the passage but thought it simply led to a gallery over the 'screens'. This is unlikely, firstly because galleries were not normally found until a much later period in the Middle Ages, secondly because there would have

347 SARAH PEARSON been no point in taking the passage to beyond the middle of the hall when a gallery could have been accessed from the corner next to the porch, and thirdly because, as the long section demonstrates, it is far too high for this purpose. 35 BL: Add. MS 32358, fol. 16. Another drawing of the same subject by Edward Blore, BL: Add. MS 42022, shows a doorway in place of the window in the service end, and this is repeated in an obviously inaccurate engraving published in the Gentleman's Magazine, vol. 103, pt 2 (1833), pi. opp. 297. While recognising that Blore's work should not be dismissed lightly, an original (as opposed to secondary) doorway in this position seems improbable. 36 Rigold, loc. cit. (note 5). 37 Gentleman's Magazine, vol. 103, pt 2 (1833), 113. 38 Lambeth Palace Library: Account Rolls, 303, 1447/8, published in Kipps, op. cit. (note 5), Appendix, 97. 39 L. F. Salzman, Building in England down to 1540 (Oxford, 1952), 380. 40 For later lodging ranges see A. Emery, 'Ralph, Lord Cromwell's Manor at Wing- field (1439-C.1450): its construction, design and influence', Archaeological Journal, 142 (1985), pp. 276-339; ibidem, Greater Medieval Houses of England and Wales, 1300-1500, vol. 1 (Cambridge, 1996), 4; vol. 2 (Cambridge, 2000), 50-1. 41 H. M. Colvin, ed., The History of the King's Works, vol 2 (London 1963), 904, 914, 916,966, 1013. 42 See Tatton-Brown, op. cit. (note 7), 35-6, where the lack of surviving evidence at Lambeth for the accommodation of the archbishop's retinue is mentioned, and the documentary evidence for thirteenth-century lodgings at the bishop of Winchester's London house is noted. 43 For the interpretation of the earthworks see the RCHME report (in note 1), 39-40. For the 18th-century nomenclature see 'A map of the palace of Charing and other houses and land adjoining in the town and parish of Charing belonging to Granville Wheler Esq., 1736' (CKS: U 1293, 4). 44 Westminster Abbey Muniments: 9222. Du Boulay, op. cit. (note 2), 256, thought this document dated from 1343, but this has been revised to 1348 by C. M. Woolgar, House- hold Accounts from Medieval England, pt 2, British Academy, Records of Social and Econ- omic History, NS XVII (Oxford, 1992), 716; see also the discussion in Appendix 2. 45 The wording of the document means that the exact amounts bought or used are confusing, and it would probably be necessary to study the whole document in detail to work out the quantities accurately. The reference to three boys delivering in the town (conductorum in villa), suggests that food and drink may have been distributed locally while the archbishop was in Charing. 46 Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1324-27, 273 47 Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vol. 6, (1392-99), 92-3, no. 331, which suggests that leasing was already in place. 48 Lambeth Palace Library: Account Rolls, ED 300, 302, 303 (302 and 303 are published in Kipps, op. cit. (note 5), 96-7), 1223, 1225, 1227, 1236. 49 There is evidence for early walling in the kitchen range and the later roof is formed by rafters from a medieval smoke-blackened crown-post roof. 50 This was drawn as a late fifteenth or early sixteenth-century doorway by William Twopeny in 1829 (see E. R. Swain, William Twopeny in Kent (Sittingbourne, 1986), plate 14). He also shows the mid height doorway which still exists. This, which gives access to a narrow stair to the second floor, is a much later insertion, probably put in when the upper storey ceased to be part of the domestic accommodation of the farm- house and internal access was no longer required.

348 THE ARCHBISHOP'S PALACE AT CHARING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

51 Rigold, loc. cit. (note 5). 52 Excavations conducted for Maidstone Borough Council by the Kent Archaeologi- cal Research Unit, whose report may in due course clarify the matter. The writer is grateful to Mr Brian Philp for discussing this with her, and to Mr A. Tomlin of Maid- stone Borough Council for sharing his interpretation of the remains. 53 P.A. Faulkner, 'Some medieval archiepiscopal palaces', Archaeological Journal, vol. 127 (1970), 135. 54 For a plan of Mayfield, drawn by E. Roberts in the 19th century, see M. Wood, op. cit. (note 26), 52. 55 Lease 52 in F. R. H. Du Boulay, ed., 'Calendar of demesne leases made by Arch- bishop Warham', Kent Records, Kentish Medieval Society (1964), 280. 56 Rolls Series, 60, II, 374. 57 T. L. Smith, ed., The Itinerary of John Leland, vol. 4 (1962), 62. 58 Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1494-1509, passim. 59 Henry VIII, Letters and Papers Foreign and Domestic, passim. 60 F. R. H. Du Boulay, loc. cit. (note 4). 61 This and subsequent leases are listed in The Topographer and Genealogist, vol. 2 (London, 1853), 256-7. 62 P. Winzar, 'Peirce House, Charing: the house and its owners', Archaeologia Can- tiana, vol. Ill (1993); Brent pedigree opposite p. 180. 63 PRO: Special Commissions and Returns in the Exchequer, E 178/1111, 19 Elizabeth. 64 Hasted, op. cit. (note 17), vol. VII, 434, and CKS: U390 Tl. 65CKS:U390T1. 66 Ibid. 67 For the dates of Easter in the mid fourteenth century see C. R. Cheney, A Handbook of Dates (London, reprinted 1978), table 30; Woolgar, op. cit. (note 44).

349 SARAH PEARSON

350